A clinical study on the efficacy and safety of poly-herbal formulation in managing functional dyspepsia

Q3 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics Phytomedicine Plus Pub Date : 2024-11-08 DOI:10.1016/j.phyplu.2024.100671
Debasish Hota , Anand Srinivasan , Manas Kumar Panigrahi , Snigdha Suman Dalua , Poorva Tiwari , Ramachandran Valavan
{"title":"A clinical study on the efficacy and safety of poly-herbal formulation in managing functional dyspepsia","authors":"Debasish Hota ,&nbsp;Anand Srinivasan ,&nbsp;Manas Kumar Panigrahi ,&nbsp;Snigdha Suman Dalua ,&nbsp;Poorva Tiwari ,&nbsp;Ramachandran Valavan","doi":"10.1016/j.phyplu.2024.100671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Functional dyspepsia is a common condition that affects millions of people worldwide. It is characterized by symptoms such as abdominal discomfort, bloating, and nausea, which can significantly impact a person's quality of life. While there are several pharmaceutical treatments available, many individuals are turning to herbal remedies as a safer and more natural alternative. This clinical study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of poly-herbal formulation (PHF), marketed under brand names like Dizester® Herbal, Great Day®, etc. in patients suffering from functional dyspepsia compared to Pantoprazole, a commonly used pharmaceutical treatment.</div></div><div><h3>Materials &amp; Methods</h3><div>The study included 80 patients, with 40 patients in each treatment arm. The primary objective was to assess the improvement in symptoms using various questionnaires at All India Institute of Medical Science Bhubaneswar, including the Reflux Disease Questionnaire, Short-Form Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire, GERD-Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and Investigator's Symptomatic Assessment. The secondary objective was to evaluate the safety of PHF by assessing liver and renal function parameters and hemogram.</div></div><div><h3>Results &amp; discussion</h3><div>The results showed significant improvement in symptoms of GERD in the PHF group, which was comparable to the Pantoprazole group. The burning feeling behind the breastbone, pain behind the breastbone, burning feeling in the center of the upper stomach, acid taste in the mouth, and unpleasant movement of material upwards towards the mouth improved significantly from the beginning of the study to the follow-up visits. The mean VAS score reduced by 71.5 % in the PHF arm and 67.85 % in the Pantoprazole arm. Additionally, the study found no abnormal elevations in liver and renal function parameters in blood or any abnormal changes in hemogram, indicating the safety for use in patients with functional dyspepsia. Since the synthetic anti-dyspeptic drugs like proton pump inhibitors are known to have adverse effects, this natural alternative PHF shows promising results in a safer way.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In conclusion, this study provides evidence for the efficacy and safety of PHF in improving symptoms of functional dyspepsia. The use of synthetic anti-dyspeptic medications has been associated with the occurrence of undesirable effects. In light of this, PHF has demonstrated encouraging outcomes in a manner that is considered safer.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34599,"journal":{"name":"Phytomedicine Plus","volume":"5 1","pages":"Article 100671"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Phytomedicine Plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667031324001453","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Functional dyspepsia is a common condition that affects millions of people worldwide. It is characterized by symptoms such as abdominal discomfort, bloating, and nausea, which can significantly impact a person's quality of life. While there are several pharmaceutical treatments available, many individuals are turning to herbal remedies as a safer and more natural alternative. This clinical study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of poly-herbal formulation (PHF), marketed under brand names like Dizester® Herbal, Great Day®, etc. in patients suffering from functional dyspepsia compared to Pantoprazole, a commonly used pharmaceutical treatment.

Materials & Methods

The study included 80 patients, with 40 patients in each treatment arm. The primary objective was to assess the improvement in symptoms using various questionnaires at All India Institute of Medical Science Bhubaneswar, including the Reflux Disease Questionnaire, Short-Form Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire, GERD-Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and Investigator's Symptomatic Assessment. The secondary objective was to evaluate the safety of PHF by assessing liver and renal function parameters and hemogram.

Results & discussion

The results showed significant improvement in symptoms of GERD in the PHF group, which was comparable to the Pantoprazole group. The burning feeling behind the breastbone, pain behind the breastbone, burning feeling in the center of the upper stomach, acid taste in the mouth, and unpleasant movement of material upwards towards the mouth improved significantly from the beginning of the study to the follow-up visits. The mean VAS score reduced by 71.5 % in the PHF arm and 67.85 % in the Pantoprazole arm. Additionally, the study found no abnormal elevations in liver and renal function parameters in blood or any abnormal changes in hemogram, indicating the safety for use in patients with functional dyspepsia. Since the synthetic anti-dyspeptic drugs like proton pump inhibitors are known to have adverse effects, this natural alternative PHF shows promising results in a safer way.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study provides evidence for the efficacy and safety of PHF in improving symptoms of functional dyspepsia. The use of synthetic anti-dyspeptic medications has been associated with the occurrence of undesirable effects. In light of this, PHF has demonstrated encouraging outcomes in a manner that is considered safer.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
多草药配方治疗功能性消化不良的有效性和安全性临床研究
导言功能性消化不良是一种常见病,影响着全球数百万人。它以腹部不适、腹胀和恶心等症状为特征,会严重影响患者的生活质量。虽然目前有多种药物治疗方法,但许多人将草药疗法作为一种更安全、更天然的替代疗法。这项临床研究旨在评估以 Dizester® Herbal、Great Day® 等品牌销售的多草药配方 (PHF) 与常用药物治疗方法泮托拉唑相比,对功能性消化不良患者的疗效和安全性。主要目的是在全印度医学科学研究所布巴内斯瓦尔分院使用各种问卷评估症状的改善情况,包括反流病问卷、短式利兹消化不良问卷、胃食管反流病-健康相关生活质量问卷、疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)和研究者症状评估。次要目的是通过评估肝、肾功能参数和血象来评价 PHF 的安全性。结果及amp; 讨论结果显示 PHF 组胃食管反流症状明显改善,与泮托拉唑组相当。从研究开始到随访期间,胸骨后烧灼感、胸骨后疼痛、上腹部中心烧灼感、口中有酸味、口腔内有异物上移等症状明显改善。PHF 治疗组的平均 VAS 评分降低了 71.5%,泮托拉唑治疗组降低了 67.85%。此外,研究还发现血液中的肝肾功能参数没有异常升高,血液图也没有任何异常变化,这表明在功能性消化不良患者中使用是安全的。众所周知,质子泵抑制剂等合成抗消化不良药物会产生不良反应,而这种天然替代品 PHF 则以更安全的方式显示出良好的效果。使用合成抗消化不良药物会产生不良反应。有鉴于此,PHF 以更安全的方式取得了令人鼓舞的成果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Phytomedicine Plus
Phytomedicine Plus Medicine-Complementary and Alternative Medicine
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
178
审稿时长
81 days
期刊介绍:
期刊最新文献
Exploration of analgesic and anthelmintic activities of Artocarpus chaplasha ROXB. leaves supported by in silico molecular docking Telomerase inhibiting phytochemicals derived from Blumea eriantha for cancer treatment: A comprehensive computational analysis Shaoyao Gancao decoction alleviates paclitaxel-induced cognitive impairment by activating PTEN/PI3K/AKT pathway to inhibit NETs formation Shramahara Mahakasya, a traditional polyherbal formulation, induces anti-anxiety activity in hippocampal neurons by effectuating SOD2-mediated protection against oxidative stress Phytochemical and pharmacological review of Erica Genus (L.) Ericaceae plants
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1